Archived: Sandown Park Care Home

All the people we spoke with told us people were cared for well. One relative said 'The staff are lovely. I can always talk to them. They are gentle, kind and patient. They respond quickly. I am more than happy for X to be here.' Another relative told us 'I'm very pleased with the home. It's excellent.'

We saw people had drinks available throughout the day. Meals and snacks were offered regularly, and staff supported people to eat and drink. One care worker told us 'The meals are good. I would eat them.' Records showed staff were aware of people's nutritional needs, and responded appropriately and promptly to changes in weight and appetite.

We observed staff were patient and gentle with people. People turned to staff for comfort or reassurance, and we saw this was readily provided. All the relatives and people who use the service told us they felt people were safe in the home. We saw staff maintained up to date training in safeguarding vulnerable adults. Staff were aware of the process to raise safeguarding concerns, and knew the authorities to inform. One care worker told us 'We care for people, they are well looked after. People are happy here.'

We saw people's care needs were clearly documented, with assessments and monthly reviews recorded. Staff explained how they sought input from people and their relatives in care planning, and ensured people's personal preferences were met where possible. One relative told us how they had chosen to place a loved one at the home because of the care another of their relatives had previously received there. They told us they 'cannot fault the home.'

We spoke with eight staff members, who told us they received regular training, supervisions and appraisals. We saw this was documented. One care worker said 'The manager ensures everyone is trained so that we understand what we are doing.'

The provider carried out regular quality assessments to ensure the service maintained appropriate checks and reviews in accordance with policies and procedures.

Records were stored and disposed of appropriately. Access to personal records for people who use the service and staff working at the service was suitably restricted.

We observed staff engaging with people living in the home and appeared to show due respect for them.

All of the visitors we spoke to were unanimous in their praise of the care staff and management. One person told us "staff managed my relative's care needs effectively. They need help with their personal care and I am happy with the way that this is done". One visitor described the home as "the best one around" and said that they had raised one minor concern that had been resolved the same day.

From our review of care records we saw that relatives had contributed to care planning in some instances, but there was little evidence that people living in the home had been involved in agreeing their plans of care.

The environment was found to be homely with good lighting, good decorative order and with clean furnishings. There were numerous photographs around the home depicting social activities enjoyed by the people living there. There was evidence of art work produced by people living in the home and this contributed to the welcoming atmosphere. There was free access to areas including the dining areas and lounges.